Glenn Greenwald gets to Brass Tacks: Biden, Ukraine, War, Loan Guarantees
Glenn Greenwald's article censored by The Intercept is the best and most comprehensive work on the Biden controversy. I hope everyone here can take the time to read it because we will need this insight to cope with whatever happens next week and going forward.
The most important part of it, I think, is Greenwald's focus on Biden's dealing in a $1 billion loan guarantee to Ukraine. I have emphasized his strongest point with bold type, below.
Arming NAZI paramilitary groups was a separate subsidy to Ukraine, but was it a separate policy? Killing and removing the people of eastern Ukraine worked hand in hand with our policy of loan guarantees. For what? If Ukraine was struggling so much, how could an "energy holding company," Burisma, afford to pay a lawyer $50,000 a month? Where was the money coming from, where was it going, and why was it accompanied by NAZI death squads?
The mainstream media answers such questions with the theory that the U.S. was trying to clean up Ukraine. I don't know how to describe my disgust with that assertion, but with all the respect I have for the writers and readers at C99, I have to ask, Does that sound right to you?
... Much of this controversy centers on Biden's aggressive efforts while Vice President in late 2015 to force the Ukrainian government to fire its Chief Prosecutor, Viktor Shokhin, and replace him with someone acceptable to the U.S., which turned out to be Yuriy Lutsenko. These events are undisputed by virtue of a video of Biden boasting in front of an audience of how he flew to Kiev and forced the Ukrainians to fire Shokhin, upon pain of losing $1 billion in aid.
But two towering questions have long been prompted by these events, and the recently published emails make them more urgent than ever: 1) was the firing of the Ukrainian General Prosecutor such a high priority for Biden as Vice President of the U.S. because of his son's highly lucrative role on the board of Burisma, and 2) if that was not the motive, why was it so important for Biden to dictate who the chief prosecutor of Ukraine was?
The standard answer to the question about Biden's motive -- offered both by Biden and his media defenders -- is that he, along with the IMF and EU, wanted Shokhin fired because the U.S. and its allies were eager to clean up Ukraine, and they viewed Shokhin as insufficiently vigilant in fighting corruption.
“Biden’s brief was to sweet-talk and jawbone Poroshenko into making reforms that Ukraine’s Western benefactors wanted to see as,” wrote the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler in what the Post calls a “fact-check.” Kessler also endorsed the key defense of Biden: that the firing of Shokhin was bad for Burima, not good for it. “The United States viewed [Shokhin] as ineffective and beholden to Poroshenko and Ukraine’s corrupt oligarchs. In particular, Shokin had failed to pursue an investigation of the founder of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky,” Kessler claims.
But that claim does not even pass the laugh test. The U.S. and its European allies are not opposed to corruption by their puppet regimes. They are allies with the most corrupt regimes on the planet, from Riyadh to Cairo, and always have been. Since when does the U.S. devote itself to ensuring good government in the nations it is trying to control? If anything, allowing corruption to flourish has been a key tool in enabling the U.S. to exert power in other countries and to open up their markets to U.S. companies...
I think with this statement Greenwald is clarifying the entire period of deception, impeachment, desperation and malfeasance we have witnessed in the last 4 years.